Lihua P, Chen X Y, Wu T X
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Apr 16;2008(2):CD005589. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005589.pub2.
Chemotherapeutic agents such as topotecan can be used to treat ovarian cancer. The effects of using topotecan as a therapeutic agent have not been previously been systematically reviewed.
To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of topotecan for the treatment of ovarian cancer.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (Issue 4, 2006); Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Review Group (CGCRG) Specialised Register (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1990 to 27 July 2006); EMBASE (January 1990 to 27 July 2006); The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) database (to 1 August 2006); CBM (Chinese Biomedical Database) (January 1990 to 27 July 2006).
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which randomized patients with ovarian cancer to single or combined use of topotecan versus interventions without topotecan, or different remedies of topotecan.
Two review authors independently extracted and analysed data.
Six studies including 1323 participants were eligible for this review (Gordon 2004a; Gore 2001a; Gore 2002; Hoskins 1998; Huinink 2004; Placido 2004) All studies, as reported, were identified as being of poor methodological quality. Topotecan had comparable effectiveness to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) compared with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), (16.1 weeks versus 17.0 weeks; p = 0.095). Overall survival (OS) time was similar in participants using PLD compared with topotecan (56.7 weeks versus 60 weeks; p = 0.341). Topotecan was more hematologically toxic compared with paclitaxel or PLD, relative risks (RRs) of hematological events: ranged from 1.03 to 14.46 and 1.73 to 27.12 respectively. A 21-day cycle of topotecan was more toxic than a 42-day cycle (RRs of hematological and non-hematological events ranged from 1.03 to 8). Intravenous and oral topotecan had comparable toxicity. Topotecan delayed progression more effectively compared with paclitaxel (23.1 weeks versus 14 weeks, p = 0.0021). Participants were more likely to respond to topotecan on a 21-day cycle as opposed to a 42-day cycle (RR 7.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 55.36). Small tumor diameter, sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy was associated with better prognosis. Small sample size, methodological flaws and poor reporting of the included trials made measurement bias of the trials difficult to assess.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Topotecan appears to have a similar level of effectiveness as paclitaxel and PLD, though with different patterns of side effects. Larger, well-designed RCTs are required in order to define an optimal regime.
拓扑替康等化疗药物可用于治疗卵巢癌。此前尚未对使用拓扑替康作为治疗药物的效果进行系统评价。
系统评价拓扑替康治疗卵巢癌的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL,2006年第4期);Cochrane妇科癌症综述小组(CGCRG)专业注册库(Cochrane图书馆2006年第4期);医学期刊数据库(MEDLINE,1990年1月至2006年7月27日);荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE,1990年1月至2006年7月27日);欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织(EORTC)数据库(至2006年8月1日);中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM,1990年1月至2006年7月27日)。
随机对照试验(RCT),将卵巢癌患者随机分为拓扑替康单药或联合用药组与未使用拓扑替康的干预措施组,或不同拓扑替康治疗方案组。
两名综述作者独立提取和分析数据。
六项研究共1323名参与者符合本综述要求(Gordon 2004a;Gore 2001a;Gore 2002;Hoskins 1998;Huinink 2004;Placido 2004)。据报道,所有研究的方法学质量均较差。与聚乙二醇化脂质体阿霉素(PLD)相比,拓扑替康在延长无进展生存期(PFS)方面具有相当的有效性(16.1周对17.0周;p = 0.095)。使用PLD的参与者与使用拓扑替康的参与者的总生存期(OS)相似(56.7周对60周;p = 0.341)。与紫杉醇或PLD相比,拓扑替康的血液学毒性更大,血液学事件的相对风险(RRs)分别为1.03至14.46和1.73至27.12。21天周期的拓扑替康比42天周期的毒性更大(血液学和非血液学事件的RRs为1.03至8)。静脉注射和口服拓扑替康的毒性相当。与紫杉醇相比,拓扑替康更有效地延迟了疾病进展(23.1周对14周,p = 0.